STS-122 (1E) Updates

Page 12 - Seeking answers about space? Join the Space community: the premier source of space exploration, innovation, and astronomy news, chronicling (and celebrating) humanity's ongoing expansion across the final frontier.
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

tanstaafl76

Guest
Interesting article found here: http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewnews.html?id=1255<br /><br /><i>Internal NASA emails from the director of Shuttle Safety at the Johnson Space Center and the Shuttle Program Manager show how they struggled with the potential risk to astronauts' lives in assessing how to proceed with the launch of Atlantis in the wake of engine cutoff (ECO) sensor malfunctions.<br /><br />Aviation Week & Space Technology obtained copies of these emails, which are reproduced largely in full here on AviationWeek.com to retain the context intended by their authors.<br /><br />The emails were sent to the team by astronaut Bill McArthur, Jr. who heads the Space Shuttle Safety and Mission Assurance Office at the Johnson Space Center and Wayne Hale, shuttle program manager.<br /><br />McArthur has launched into space three times on the shuttle, a fourth time atop a Russian Soyuz and he also commanded the International Space Station.<br /><br />The emails were sent Dec. 7. This was a day after the Atlantis countdown was scrubbed Dec. 6 when two ECO sensors failed and managers debated whether they could proceed Dec. 8 or needed more time.<br /><br />They ultimately slipped the next attempt to Dec. 9 after setting new flight rules that 4 good ECO sensors would be required.<br /><br />This was a change to the original Atlantis launch rule that said the vehicle could fly with 3 of 4.<br /><br />The Dec. 9 attempt was then scrubbed when one ECO sensor failed in the countdown, a situation that two days before, would have been "go" for launch.<br /><br />The emails indicate that some of NASA's highest managers believe that the design of the total system would enable safe launch of the shuttle, without use of any ECO sensor system at all.<br /><br />It is designed to protect against an oxygen rich engine shutdown that would cause a catastrophic explosion.<br /><br />Hale cites past flight data that indicates</i> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
M

MeteorWayne

Guest
A good summary (if clumsily worded) of the current (hahahaha) thinking.<br /><br />Thanx<br /><br />Wayne <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>
 
M

MeteorWayne

Guest
An great summary of Wayne's thinking as this has evolved.<br />Thanx to you too! <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>
 
V

vulture2

Guest
"Wouldn't it make more sense to determine if a sensor is really needed, and if so, to redesign it to be more reliable?"<br /><br /> />>If this path is taken you might as well end the Shuttle program now. There is not enough time to do this. <br /><br />I thought the lesson of Challenger was that we should take the time to do the job right. Maybe doing the job right would be just deleting the sensor. But if it's needed, and it's not reliable, we should correct the problem first.
 
B

bpcooper

Guest
They have just announced January 10 at 2:26am EST as the new target launch date. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>-Ben</p> </div>
 
M

MeteorWayne

Guest
Ooooh, cool, a night launch.<br />I can see them form here.<br /><br />As long as the problem is fixed, that would be great <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>
 
B

bobblebob

Guest
May have to take the day off work then <img src="/images/icons/laugh.gif" /><br /><br />Although a long long way off a launch yet
 
M

MeteorWayne

Guest
Looks like I'll have a busy morning at the computer!!<br /><br />Thanx <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>
 
B

bobblebob

Guest
Tanking test in on Nasa TV (media channel i believe) for people who didnt know
 
M

MeteorWayne

Guest
That's what s_g's last post was about.<br /><br />Dec. 14, 2007<br />Candrea Thomas<br />Kennedy Space Center, Fla.<br />321-867-2468<br />candrea.k.thomas@nasa.gov<br /><br />STATUS REPORT: S-121407<br /><br />NASA'S SPACE SHUTTLE PROCESSING STATUS REPORT<br /><br />Note: NASA's Kennedy Space Center issues Space Shuttle Processing <br />Status Reports periodically and is the source for information <br />regarding processing activities associated with the vehicles and <br />payloads. <br /><br />Mission: STS-122 - 24th International Space Station Flight - Columbus <br />Module <br />Vehicle: Atlantis (OV-104) <br />Location: Launch Pad 39A <br />Launch Date: Targeted for Jan. 10, 2008 <br />Crew: Frick, Poindexter, Schlegel, Eyharts, Love, Melvin, Walheim <br />Inclination/Orbit Altitude: 51.6 degrees/122 nautical miles <br /><br />Shuttle Program managers decided Thursday to target Jan. 10, 2008, to <br />launch the STS-122 mission.<br /><br />At Launch Pad 39A, preparations continue for a Dec. 18 tanking test to <br />troubleshoot the engine cutoff (ECO) sensors. Test wiring has been <br />spliced into an electrical harness in the aft main engine compartment <br />connected with the ECO sensor system. The attached wiring leads to <br />the interior of the mobile launcher platform where the time domain <br />reflectometry (TDR) test equipment will be located. This wiring is <br />being tested today. On Wednesday in the Vehicle Assembly Building, <br />the TDR was connected to the external tank to be used for STS-123. <br />This allowed a "dry" ambient temperature signature to be identified. <br />Friday in Kennedy Space Center's cryogenic test bed facility, TDR <br />instrumentation is being exposed to "wet" super-cold temperatures for <br />identifying the signature of a cryogenic environment and calibrating <br />the TDR equipment. Saturday, the TDR will be taken to the launch pad <br />and installed. The GO2 battery recharge was completed and the GH2 <br></br> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>
 
V

vulture2

Guest
As I understand it, a time domain reflectometer evaluates the impedance along a transmission line; either it will show there is an abnormality in the line, or that there is no abnormality. If there is no abnormality, what caused the failure? How will the test allow a safe launch to proceed?
 
B

billslugg

Guest
vulture2<br />I know nothing about time domain reflectometry, but I do have an EE degree. If one was to generate a sufficiently short and powerful pulse and introduce it into a network, one could look at the reflected signal and see all kinds of good information. The best situation would be to look into a long wire, because then each time segment in the reflection can be traced to one particular spot on the wire. A two or three dimensional network would be nightmarish.There will also be second and third order reflections that must be sorted out but it can be done. The key, of course, is to see an anomaly. That could be an obvious short, short to ground, or open. One could also get a clean read from another orbiter (I believe they did 124 today) then one could see much more subtle differences. <br /><br />It is likely that the glitch will know when the analysts are coming and will exhibit best behavior. I could not tell you how many times I sat waiting only to have a glitch appear the minute I left for lunch. I came to refer to some gremlins by affectionate nicknames. I sometimes went into the plant at an unannounced time or came in a different door to surprise the gremlin. I never failed to get one however. Actually, I left a few there when I retired, but they were passed on to good people. What I meant to say was that I never gave up on one. I had some go out on a flatbed to the landfill and some that got sold to other companies, but I never surrendered to one. Sort of like some of the posters here at SDC. <br /><br />My longest duration gremlin introduced himself the day I joined the paper making group in 1976. I was not authorized to actually spend money working on it, since it was considered not solvable and was not in my work plan, but I chipped away at it for 13 years. I used scavenged parts, loaner equipment, funds from other sources, borrowed labor, arm twisting, and I even stepped on a few toes. But I finally got it. In 1989 I gave a presentation to the CEO of P <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p> </p> </div>
 
M

MeteorWayne

Guest
The advantage of using the TDR (and you described the process very well) is that it can show very small anomoly's; much smaller than would be a functional fault.<br />I believe I put it as shwing things that are just thinking about being faults.<br /><br />For example, it will clearly show the connector, even a perfect one.<br /><br />It will show a wire that's been squeezed, dented, or bent too sharply.<br /><br />So even before tanking, they will have a test of that condition, showing all of these things.<br /><br />Even if after tanking things are on their best behavior (ie.e no fault) the hope is the offending connection will show a large enough change in reflectivity to pinpoint the likely cause.<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>
 
M

MeteorWayne

Guest
Or the "not quite open" <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /><br /><br />I used to repair them back when I worked at Tektronix. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>
 
B

bobblebob

Guest
Whatever the tests reveal, is there any possibility of them not having to rollback to the VAB and can fix whatever problem they find at the pad?
 
M

MeteorWayne

Guest
From what Wayne said at the Press Conference, that is a possibility.<br />Now s_g may know more than I, but it truly depends on what the problem they find is. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>
 
E

erioladastra

Guest
"Whatever the tests reveal, is there any possibility of them not having to rollback to the VAB and can fix whatever problem they find at the pad? "<br /><br />Or not fix at all - still developing procedures, rules, software, testing and simulating using alternate indications. If I were to bet I would say we are going Jan 10.
 
M

montmein69

Guest
<font color="yellow"> <br /><br />Or not fix at all - still developing procedures, rules, software, testing and simulating using alternate indications </font><br /><br /><br />Is there another way to have an accurate knowledge of the low level of LH2 in the tank (and command a MECO in the required time for safety) than using the ECO sensors ?<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
F

farmerman

Guest
Hey shuttle guy, what is your guess on what or where the problem is? From what I have been reading it's not the sensors themselves.
 
B

bobblebob

Guest
"NASA will hold a briefing no earlier than 4:30 p.m. EST, on Tuesday, Dec. 18, to discuss the results from a fueling test of the space shuttle Atlantis. "<br /><br />
 
E

earth_bound_misfit

Guest
"the failure mode has been that some will fail in about 30 min."<br /><br />Is that good or bad? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p> </p><p>----------------------------------------------------------------- </p><p>Wanna see this site looking like the old SDC uplink?</p><p>Go here to see how: <strong>SDC Eye saver </strong>  </p> </div>
 
M

MeteorWayne

Guest
Actually, I'd say that's excellent! <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>
 
M

MeteorWayne

Guest
Of course, ECO 1 was not one that failed before. Figures...<br />Was that the only one?<br /><br />Still it points to that very busy connector as the problem.<br /><br />I'm trying to imagine what kind of a fix would be possible. One possibility might be to put a slight wrinkle in the pins, so that instead of being perfectly straight, they would have a bend in them.<br /><br />something like this, where the pin is the column of x's<br /><br /><br />...x....<br />...x....<br />...x....<br />...x....<br />.....x..<br />....x...<br />....x...<br />....x...<br /><br />That small offset might be enough to cause the thermal stresses to increase the contact at that point.<br /><br />I've often used that technique in resolving intermittents in my decades of electronic experience, though I don't often deal with cryo temps <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>
 
M

montmein69

Guest
Where is located this LH2 Feedthrough Connector ?<br /><br />Any way to modify/adapt it on the pad ? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
M

MeteorWayne

Guest
IIRC, it is where the wires pass through the outside of the LH2 tank.<br />The sensors are inside the tank, the rest of the system (including wiring) is outside the tank. This is where the voltages pass through a connector, so that the electronics can be connected to the data from the sensors. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>
 
Status
Not open for further replies.